MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3197115943 · doi:10.7759/cureus.17566

Total Leukocyte Count Depicting the Degree of Inflammation in Acute Appendicitis

2021· article· en· W3197115943 on OpenAlexaff
Muhammad Bilal, Atif Yusufzai, Neelam Asghar, Ahmed Sohail, Zoobia Z. Khan, Tehreem Zahid, Hassan Mumtaz, Shahzaib Ahmad

Bibliographic record

VenueCureus · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAppendicitis Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsSt. Thomas Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAppendicitisAppendixAcute appendicitisAcute abdomenDifferential diagnosisHistopathologyInternal medicineSurgeryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Acute appendicitis (AA) is the most common cause of acute abdomen in young adults. The diagnosis is usually made on various clinical findings. However, a missed case of acute appendicitis is a catastrophe as it later presents with life-threatening complications and results in medicolegal issues. Raised total leukocyte count (TLC) is a frequent finding in patients with acute appendicitis. As a convention, a normal leukocyte count usually rules out the differential diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Recent studies claimed that a substantial proportion of patients with normal TLC also had acute appendicitis and warranted a careful evaluation of such cases before sending them home. However, the reported frequency of acute appendicitis among TLC normal patients varied greatly among studies which necessitated the present study. Aim Our aim was to determine the frequency of acute appendicitis in patients of normal TLC. Materials and methods This descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted at the Department of Surgery, KRL Hospital Islamabad. This study was carried out from 1 July 2019 to 31 December 2019. This study involved 238 patients of both genders aged between 12 and 70 years suspected of acute appendicitis on physical and ultrasound findings but with a normal TLC (4,500-11,000 WBCs/µL). The outcome variable was the frequency of acute appendicitis among such patients which was diagnosed upon surgery (inflamed appendix with free fluid) and histopathology of excised tissue (mucosal inflammation, neutrophil infiltrates, wall necrosis). Frequency of acute appendicitis was compared across various age and gender groups. Written informed consent was obtained from every patient. Results The mean age of the patients was 27.4±15.5 years. Majority (n = 167, 70.2%) of the patients were aged ≤25 years, followed by 40 (16.8%) patients aged ≥46 years and 31 (13.0%) patients aged between 26 and 45 years. There were 135 (56.7%) male and 103 (43.3%) female patients with a male to female ratio of 1.3:1. All of the patients (100.0%) had pain in the right iliac fossa (RIF) while rebound tenderness, anorexia, nausea/vomiting, fever and dysuria were noted in 83.6%, 79.0%, 73.9%, 63.9% and 15.1% patients, respectively. The diagnosis of acute appendicitis was made in 198 (83.2%) patients with normal TLC and suspicion of acute appendicitis on physical findings and ultrasound. When stratified, there was no statistically significant difference in the frequency of acute appendicitis across various age (p-value = 0.988) and gender (p-value = 0.913) groups. Conclusion In the present study, contrary to the routine impression that normal TLC rules out the differential diagnosis of acute appendicitis, a substantial proportion of patients with clinical and ultrasound suspicion of acute appendicitis but normal TLC had acute appendicitis which is worrisome as a missed case may later present with complications. The present study thus warrants cautious evaluation of clinically suspected cases with normal TLC count to avoid a missed appendicitis and improve the outcome in future surgical practice.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.440
Threshold uncertainty score0.307

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.247 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCureusSame topicAppendicitis Diagnosis and ManagementFrench-language works237,207